Paper · 1997 · International Journal of Pest Management

Local density responses of predatory insects of Helicoverpa spp. to a newly developed food supplement 'Envirofeast' in commercial cotton in Australia

R. K. Mensah

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
47
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Application of supplementary foods to attract, retain and conserve beneficial arthropods in crop systems has been used for several years on crop plants to enhance biological control of pests. The responses of predatory insects of Helicoverpa spp. to sugar and to a mixture of petroleum oil and Kelgum and newly developed food products, Envirofeast and Envirofeast B, were investigated at a commercial, irrigated cotton farm at Auscott in Narrabri in New South Wales from 1992- 94. Individual plots received 8 fortnightly applications of each substance dissolved in water and were compared with a synthetic insecticide-treated and an unsprayed plot. Adult Coccinellidae, Melyridae, Lygaeidae, Nabidae and Chrysopidae responded more positively and numbers increased more throughout the study on plots sprayed with Envirofeast A than all other treatments. In the present of Envirofeast A the predatory insects failed to respond consistently or clearly to either sucrose or a protein supplement spray used in Envirofeast B. The conventional insecticides virtually exterminated the predatory insects. In another experiment in which predatory insects were sampled at varying distances away from the Envirofeast A sprayed and unsprayed plots, predatory insects (but not spiders) were concentrated around the food sprayed plot. This study supports the findings of previous researchers that application of supplementary food can attract and concentrate entomophagous arthropods to enhance biological control of crop pests. Keywords: Helicoverpa Spp.Creontiades DilutusTetranychus UrticaeSupplementary Food CoccinellidsPredators

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Envirofeast A spray increased numbers of Coccinellidae, Melyridae, Lygaeidae, Nabidae and Chrysopidae predators more than all other treatments in commercial cotton.

Treatment
Envirofeast Ae1
Interactor
Coccinellidae, Melyridae, Lygaeidae, Nabidae and ChrysopidaeCoccinellidaeChrysopidaeLygaeidaeNabidaeMelyridaee1biocontrol_agent
Outcome
numberse1
Direction
increasede1
Comparator
all other treatmentse1
Setting
a commercial, irrigated cotton farm at Auscott in Narrabri in New South Walese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a commercial, irrigated cotton farm at Auscott in Narrabri in New South Wales”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 388–465 · show in text ↑
e1

“Adult Coccinellidae, Melyridae, Lygaeidae, Nabidae and Chrysopidae responded more positively and numbers increased more throughout the study on plots sprayed with Envirofeast A than all other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 649–851 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In cotton, predatory insects failed to respond consistently or clearly to a sucrose or protein supplement spray in the presence of Envirofeast A.

Treatment
sucrose or a protein supplement spraye2
Interactor
predatory insectse2biocontrol_agent
Outcome
failed to respond consistently or clearlye2

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a commercial, irrigated cotton farm at Auscott in Narrabri in New South Wales”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 388–465 · show in text ↑
e2

“In the present of Envirofeast A the predatory insects failed to respond consistently or clearly to either sucrose or a protein supplement spray used in Envirofeast B”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 853–1018 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Predatory insects, but not spiders, were concentrated around the food-sprayed plot in cotton.

Treatment
food sprayede3
Outcome
predatory insectse3
Direction
concentratede3
Qualifier
but not spiderse3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a commercial, irrigated cotton farm at Auscott in Narrabri in New South Wales”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 388–465 · show in text ↑
e3

“predatory insects (but not spiders) were concentrated around the food sprayed plot”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1236–1318 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional insecticides virtually exterminated predatory insects in cotton.

Treatment
conventional insecticidese4
Outcome
predatory insectse4
Direction
exterminatede4
Qualifier
virtuallye4

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a commercial, irrigated cotton farm at Auscott in Narrabri in New South Wales”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 388–465 · show in text ↑
e4

“The conventional insecticides virtually exterminated the predatory insects”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1020–1094 · show in text ↑

insecticide · pest · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

76 papers: 51 positive, 25 negative or no effect

24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 51 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

72 papers more in this group

See all 76 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.